- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Moneywerx data assessment of the U.S. sabotaging Nord Stream 2 Pipeline
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:56 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:56 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
And they waited until the Russian pipeline wasn't needed anymore to blow it up
Just because it might not be needed doesn't mean it wouldn't be used. It's still a large source of revenue for the Russkies.
Do I think we did it? Yeah. Put it it this way, if I was in Vegas and they had a prop bet for who hit the pipeline, I'd go heavy on the US. If I was a juror and the US was on trial for the hit, would I vote to convict? No
0
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:57 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
Because we actually did insane shite like that (among other insane things) but for some reason people think that the US blowing up a Russian pipeline is completely irrational and out of the realm of anything we would possibly do
You have to understand there are those that work for the MIC that post here. They are here to spread propaganda.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 2:58 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
Because we actually did insane shite like that (among other insane things) but for some reason people think that the US blowing up a Russian pipeline is completely irrational and out of the realm of anything we would possibly do.
But that reference undermines his point about papers with credibility reporting on the situation, as the NYT was publishing things on the CIA-Nicaragua connection from October 1986, one month before the leak.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:00 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:And I would use the previous two years of almost universally united media apparatuses to disprove that notion.
Because you aren't accounting for any discontents, as you are just using the frame that you don't trust the media to report anything, when European media culture is more diffuse and more likely to report things that make whatever government in charge look bad.
Look, the media of the past and the current modern industry are not even remotely alike.
Outside of politically expedient exposes on politicians and pushing for certain political parties, they don’t break significant news anymore.
So, again, no I do not believe any significantly impactful media outlet would out this.
Maybe decades in the future.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:02 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:This isn’t the 1980s anymore though.
But that reference undermines his point about papers with credibility reporting on the situation, as the NYT was publishing things on the CIA-Nicaragua connection from October 1986, one month before the leak.
The media is significantly different.
If that event occurred today, I doubt it would have been leaked.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:02 pm to Scruffy
quote:
Look, the media of the past and the current modern industry are not even remotely alike.
Likewise, the media of the US and the media of Europe are not remotely alike.
quote:
Outside of politically expedient exposes on politicians and pushing for certain political parties, they don’t break significant news anymore.
Uh, you don't think that if there were riots in Germany, right-leaning papers like FAZ and DW wouldn't attempt to undermine the SPD? You are making a really bad argument here.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:03 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
But that reference undermines his point about papers with credibility reporting on the situation, as the NYT was publishing things on the CIA-Nicaragua connection from October 1986, one month before the leak.
I wasn't trying to support his specific point about releasing information.
I'm saying that people who dismiss this as simply too crazy for the US to do are completely dismissing the fact that it's right in our wheelhouse.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:03 pm to GumboPot
Whoever wrote this doesn't know much about Pipelines, ASW Ops or torpedoes. Other than that, it's an amusing and thoroughly false article.
quote:
The FY14 DOT&E report assessed the Mk 54 (BUG) torpedo as not operationally effective in its intended role: "During operationally challenging and realistic scenarios, the Mk 54 (BUG) demonstrated below threshold performance and exhibited many of the same failure mechanisms observed during the FY 2004 initial operational testing". Shortfalls were also identified with the employing platforms’ tactics and tactical documentation, and interoperability problems with some platform fire control systems.[
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:03 pm to jcaz
quote:
Are we sure the P-8 wasn’t around there doing analysis post explosion and the drop was a result of atmospheric interference from the venting of gas or other natural effects?
If this is the case, there are a few things that would be apparent:
-- there would be more than one P-8 in the area.
-- they would be OVER that damage spot and flying a visible search pattern of the area. Not merely performing an erratic fly-by.
Also to consider, 100% our Navy knows exactly what happened. They have a lot of ears listening to the oceans. They know exactly what happened and when.
The fact that the US has not announced what they know, means they are hiding the truth. If it was a natural phenomenon, they would publish the data/information to support it.
They are hiding it for either backroom political gains with the country that did this, or because the US did the deed, and they are working to obscure that fact.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:03 pm to Scruffy
quote:
The media is significantly different.
In the US.
Why you are applying that to countries whose own internal media culture you know nothing about is the contention here.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:09 pm to GumboPot
quote:
NATO. NATO is supposed to be a defensive alliance but has been acting pretty offensive toward Russia since the fall of the USSR
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:13 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:Sure…and also pretty similar in their actions as well.
Likewise, the media of the US and the media of Europe are not remotely alike.
There are more in Europe, broken down by ideological lines though.
quote:They will likely ask the question even if the west didn’t do it, in order to fuel differing political groups to action and gain political power.
Uh, you don't think that if there were riots in Germany, right-leaning papers like FAZ and DW wouldn't attempt to undermine the SPD?
I suspect that will actually happen this winter, with large amounts of speculation.
But, no, I don’t expect anyone to post any significant information or leaks pertaining to this, if it was the west who acted.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:14 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
I'm saying that people who dismiss this as simply too crazy for the US to do are completely dismissing the fact that it's right in our wheelhouse.
I'm certainly not dismissing the possibility that the US did it, but I'm also not dismissing the Russians. In the lead-up to this, Russia shut down NS1 completely after European governments expected it to continue production. In the same Reuters article, Putin is quoted to having said 'There is only one thing left for us to do, as in a famous Russian folk tale, we will chant: "let the wolf's tail freeze,"' which is an odd statement, given Russian reliance on O and G receipts. Here's a Pravda link in place of the Reuters link that I can't seem to find at the moment: LINK
The logic behind this fits in with previous USSR and Russia actions, as his deterrence strategy of using NG as a bargaining chip to moderate Europe's position on Ukraine has largely failed, and thus places the decision to 'collide' with Russia squarely in the hands of the West. In that sense, he is attempting to engineer compulsion on the other side by ensuring a collision if the other party does not attempt to move, if that makes sense.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:16 pm to Scruffy
quote:
Sure…and also pretty similar in their actions as well.
Not really.
quote:
There are more in Europe, broken down by ideological lines though.
This undermines your point. The reason why the US can seemingly control narratives is that media is sort of a captured market. A market driven by ideological interests is going to be driven by both that ideology and by the potential profit it could spur through the release of the story.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:18 pm to GumboPot
I think it's possible that we did this. Either that or Greta Thunburg has far more advanced eco-terrorist weapons at her disposal than we all thought.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:20 pm to crazy4lsu
I am not dismissing the Russians entirely, but I find it far more plausible that it was performed by the west, since Russia fully loses that bargaining chip come wintertime.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:20 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:Completely disagree, based on the last 2 years.
Not really.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:23 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
I'm certainly not dismissing the possibility that the US did it, but I'm also not dismissing the Russians. In the lead-up to this, Russia shut down NS1 completely after European governments expected it to continue production. In the same Reuters article, Putin is quoted to having said 'There is only one thing left for us to do, as in a famous Russian folk tale, we will chant: "let the wolf's tail freeze,"' which is an odd statement, given Russian reliance on O and G receipts. Here's a Pravda link in place of the Reuters link that I can't seem to find at the moment: LINK
I don't see how "let the wolf's tail freeze" equates to them blowing up their own pipeline and taking away their own leverage.
quote:
The logic behind this fits in with previous USSR and Russia actions, as his deterrence strategy of using NG as a bargaining chip to moderate Europe's position on Ukraine has largely failed, and thus places the decision to 'collide' with Russia squarely in the hands of the West. In that sense, he is attempting to engineer compulsion on the other side by ensuring a collision if the other party does not attempt to move, if that makes sense.
It may have "failed" in the previous 8 months, but I just don't understand why he would take the option completely off the table.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:25 pm to upgrayedd
quote:Exactly my point.
I don't see how "let the wolf's tail freeze" equates to them blowing up their own pipeline and taking away their own leverage.
They don’t gain anything here.
They lose a massive amount of leverage, even if that leverage wasn’t currently a factor.
This post was edited on 10/4/22 at 3:26 pm
Posted on 10/4/22 at 3:26 pm to Scruffy
Some of these analyses seem like overly-academitized gobbledy asian
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News